Anonymous wrote:

It is not useless. It is a revenue stream

It's a revenue stream from people who are either running red lights or driving at least 12 mph over the posted speed limit (which is the MAXIMUM legal speed, by the way, not the target speed). If people choose to do those things, I have no problem with them paying fines for it. It would be better if they didn't do those things, of course. And that way they wouldn't have to pay fines, either.

I don't know why you're assuming that MCDOT traffic enforcement will include people making traffic stops.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But that's not what they are proposing. They want all traffic enforcement gone. They want to shift traffic to the Department of Transportation. Both automated and live traffic enforcement (they are doing a study on that now). And then fire police because they aren't "needed" anymore, and shift the funds to mental health services.

Shifting traffic enforcement to MCDOT is shifting traffic enforcement to MCDOT, not getting rid of traffic enforcement. What's more, I think that traffic enforcement should be shifted to MCDOT. Let the police focus on criminal offenses (like DUIs), not civil offenses (like speeding). Also, state law governs where speed cameras can go, whether it's the police or MCDOT placing them.

And mental health services also shouldn't be a policing matter. It's bad for the police, it's bad for people with mental health issues, it has bad outcomes for everyone - why would the police oppose this?

*State law requires people to obey police regarding traffic enforcement. There is no state law that says we have to obey civilian enforcers of any sort. https://law.justia.com/codes/maryland/2019/transportation/title-21/subtitle-1/sect-21-103/ That could be changed, but it has to be done at the state level, not at the county. So they are SOL if they think they can do it themselves.

If you shift it to transportation, what provisions are you making both for employee safety at traffic stops as well as driver safety at traffic stops? What is the background vetting process of civilian employees? It's not as good as the police vetting process. If you conduct a similar background check, are you prepared to pay a salary commensurate with hiring and retaining appropriately-qualified and safe employees?

Police get trained to drive, too. Will the transportation employees get trained as well? What's the cost there? What other training will civilians need? What is the backup protocol if they find an angry, potentially violent driver who tries to back up over them? Or swing their car door out to hit them? Or push them into traffic? Police are trained to avoid or mitigate that. Civilians aren't. They could be. But is that the most efficient use of tax dollars when there is a system in place now?

What safeguards will you put in place to ensure the civilian transportation employee conducts him/herself appropriately at the stop? And doesn't demand sexual favors or masturbates in front of the person stopped? To ensure they don't demand bribes to avoid issuing citations? Police have dash video cameras and body cameras. Will you issue those on civilians? What's the cost? Why not improve the system you have now instead of eliminating it in favor of the unknown? Even Berkeley just ditched their commitment to moving toward civilian traffic enforcement and went instead with a refined police reform package that addresses racial disparities and traffic stop safety -- by police. https://www.berkeleyside.com/2021/02/24/berkeley-police-reform-traffic-stops-racial-disparities

*State law specifies the types of areas that a speed camera can be installed. For most of the state, a local jurisdiction can only place a speed camera near a school. Period. Montgomery County has an exception that allows for installation in residential areas. After that, placement is determined by the local jurisdiction based on speed and and crash data. That's the most equitable, non-biased way to do it. If you allow politicians to cater to citizen requests, you will have bias that disproportionately impacts people of color and income. And you can't prove otherwise when people start suing. Much of overpolicing happens at the request of others with power. You take away what objectivity there is in the system and make it entirely political. And we know how that goes.

*The police are not opposing increasing mental health services at all. Everything I've read says they support it. But everything I've listened to during these briefings says that mental health workers don't want to respond without police because it's dangerous. Everyone is focusing on the subject of a stop or call, but nobody is paying any attention to everyone else at the scene. Police, victims, bystanders, new civilian staff. Politicians have a duty to the civilian employees that they put in harm's way.

*Nobody in the local police reform movement is recognizing the systems that are set up already to ensure both officer and community safety. And nobody is addressing what it will take to replicate it elsewhere. Nobody says they are perfect. They can be improved. Why aren't people focusing on that? Truly, I am dumbfounded that nobody is suggesting making improvements within policing, but instead going straight to the facile "solution" of eliminating policing. Instead, please be Berkeley.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is it with the entire county government having a bone to pick with LEOs?

Hans Riemer and Marc Elrich are currently having a Twitter fight over who hates cops more. No lie. And Jawando has been actively pro-abolishing police from the getgo. Why does the entire county government listen to the wokest of the woke and basicaly jump on the ACAB bandwagon instead of listening to ordinary residents, many of color, who want to feel safe in their neighborhoods and schools?

Ordinary residents are not speaking up. Where are you? It’s a bunch of loud extremists who are going to be the ones to reduce patrol in Wheaton and Silver Spring. Stop traffic enforcement. Pull SROs out of schools. And more. It’s unbelievable. The advocates and politicians are so trapped in their bubble, they don’t hear any dissenting opinions.

It doesn’t have to be less or no police to address racially disparate contact. These folks are apparently intellectually incapable of making program changes that would meet their completely reasonable goals of safer and more equitable policing.

Actually the idea is more traffic enforcement - specifically, automated traffic enforcement. Which removes potential bias from traffic enforcement AND frees up police officers to do other things.

That manages speeding and running red lights and nothing else.

???? That seems like a good thing to me, not a bad thing. Police officers won't have to manage speeding and red light running, the cameras can do it! Yay!

If someone run a red light at high speed under influence , s/he may kill a person in the next few seconds. I would prefer a police to stop this driver immediately. Cops also catch drivers with stolen cars when they catch drivers who run red loght or stop sign. Many of them are teenagers.
A ticket in your mailbox is useless.

It is not useless. It is a revenue stream

They hate cops, but I don’t see any of them declining the county police protective details assigned to their meetings and public appearances.

Nah, those cops are ok, because, you know, they keep away the riff-raff. Their own little Praetorian Guards.

Anonymous wrote:

But that's not what they are proposing. They want all traffic enforcement gone. They want to shift traffic to the Department of Transportation. Both automated and live traffic enforcement (they are doing a study on that now). And then fire police because they aren't "needed" anymore, and shift the funds to mental health services.

Shifting traffic enforcement to MCDOT is shifting traffic enforcement to MCDOT, not getting rid of traffic enforcement. What's more, I think that traffic enforcement should be shifted to MCDOT. Let the police focus on criminal offenses (like DUIs), not civil offenses (like speeding). Also, state law governs where speed cameras can go, whether it's the police or MCDOT placing them.

And mental health services also shouldn't be a policing matter. It's bad for the police, it's bad for people with mental health issues, it has bad outcomes for everyone - why would the police oppose this?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Nobody is saying that is a bad thing. It's just not a comprehensive solution. Have you all read the task force report on public safety reform? It's a nightmare.

A solution is a solution, even if it's not a comprehensive solution.

But that's not what they are proposing. They want all traffic enforcement gone. They want to shift traffic to the Department of Transportation. Both automated and live traffic enforcement (they are doing a study on that now). And then fire police because they aren't "needed" anymore, and shift the funds to mental health services.

Hucker and a few others want the automated traffic enforcement shifted to Transportation so that the politicians can influence where to put cameras, instead of basing it off of speed data and crash data. And nobody cares about the safety of the poor civilian transportation staff who will be out there trying to pull people over.

They are about to pull SROs out of school, not realizing that arrests of kids of color might actually increase because there will no longer be any established relationships that make the officers see the kids as individuals with unique challenges. Who understand why Johnny is carrying a knife, because he's scared of Joey and his 12 friends who jumped him last month. Instead, it will be a responding patrol officer who sees nothing but a statistic. Black male student with a concealed knife.

We are about to send our students back to school after a year of social isolation and ever-increasing mental health stress, and we expect schools to be magically safe when they all return?

But the defund movement might take care of itself. All the good cops are leaving and nobody is applying to join. The caliber of the department is suffering tremendously. And the community will end up with the type of department they accuse it of being.

These politicans want political points and truly do not care what the impact is on the community. I guess it will take increased crime and more pedestrian deaths to wake people back up. Then expect it to take at least a decade to repair.

Anonymous wrote:

Nobody is saying that is a bad thing. It's just not a comprehensive solution. Have you all read the task force report on public safety reform? It's a nightmare.

A solution is a solution, even if it's not a comprehensive solution.